Holding Pattern Question

On 09/26/07 12:02, Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
"Bonehenge (B A R R Y)" wrote in message
...

Receivers are simpler than transmitters?


If it's just your transmitter that has failed you have not experienced a
two-way radio communications failure.



Say What? ;-)

If you lose either TX or RX, then you don't have two-way communications.
Therefore you have two-way radio communications failure and should operate
according to 91.185.



--
Mark Hansen, PP-ASEL, Instrument Airplane, USUA Ultralight Pilot
Cal Aggie Flying Farmers
Sacramento, CA

"Mark Hansen" wrote in message
...

Say What? ;-)


If it's just your transmitter that has failed you have not experienced a
two-way radio communications failure. Better the second time?



If you lose either TX or RX, then you don't have two-way communications.
Therefore you have two-way radio communications failure and should operate
according to 91.185.


If you lose just transmitter or just receiver you can still communicate
one-way. Two-way radio communications failure means loss of both
transmitter and receiver.

On 09/26/07 13:39, Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
"Mark Hansen" wrote in message
...

Say What? ;-)


If it's just your transmitter that has failed you have not experienced a
two-way radio communications failure. Better the second time?



If you lose either TX or RX, then you don't have two-way communications.
Therefore you have two-way radio communications failure and should operate
according to 91.185.


If you lose just transmitter or just receiver you can still communicate
one-way. Two-way radio communications failure means loss of both
transmitter and receiver.



That's ridiculous.

Mark Hansen wrote in
:

If you lose just transmitter or just receiver you can still
communicate one-way. Two-way radio communications failure means loss
of both transmitter and receiver.



That's ridiculous.

"Bugsmasher 34 Romeo, if you read, squawk 4221"

On 09/27/07 11:44, John Godwin wrote:
Mark Hansen wrote in
:

If you lose just transmitter or just receiver you can still
communicate one-way. Two-way radio communications failure means loss
of both transmitter and receiver.



That's ridiculous.

"Bugsmasher 34 Romeo, if you read, squawk 4221"

Yes, you could also use smoke signals, rock your wings, etc. - However,
if you think that losing your transmitter during an IFR flight is not
considered a "two way radio communications failure" as used in 91.185
you're fooling yourself.

In article ,
John Godwin wrote:

Mark Hansen wrote in
:

If you lose just transmitter or just receiver you can still
communicate one-way. Two-way radio communications failure means loss
of both transmitter and receiver.



That's ridiculous.

"Bugsmasher 34 Romeo, if you read, squawk 4221"

In my case, it was, "N17AV, if you read this transmission, turn left 30
degrees and ident", which was soon followed by, "Radar contact, continue
along previously cleared route". Or words to that effect.

Our route was POU V157 HAARP HPN. Once you get to the bend in V157, you're
very close to the ILS-16 localizer. We decided to just go for the
localizer as soon as we got there. The moment we left the airway, we
heard, "N17AV, you appear to be flying the ILS-16, cleared approach".

We flew the approach. We didn't see any light signals from the tower, nor
did we waste any effort looking for them. We landed, and taxied off the
runway. Our handheld VHF, which didn't work for **** in the air, was able
to talk to ground. We taxied back to the ramp with them and that was the
end of that.

If you lose either TX or RX, then you don't have two-way communications.
Therefore you have two-way radio communications failure and should
operate
according to 91.185.


If you lose just transmitter or just receiver you can still communicate
one-way. Two-way radio communications failure means loss of both
transmitter and receiver.

This argument reminds me of the debate of which is the inner or outer knob
on our GPSs.

Kobra

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
...

"Mark Hansen" wrote in message
...

Say What? ;-)


If it's just your transmitter that has failed you have not experienced a
two-way radio communications failure. Better the second time?



If you lose either TX or RX, then you don't have two-way communications.
Therefore you have two-way radio communications failure and should
operate
according to 91.185.


If you lose just transmitter or just receiver you can still communicate
one-way. Two-way radio communications failure means loss of both
transmitter and receiver.


Steve, quit being so argumentative and think for a change. Two-way
communication means the radio (hence operator) can send (1 way) and receive
(1 way). If you lose the transmitter or the receiver you are no longer in
two-way communication, although you may in fact still be in one-way
communication. How much simpler can that be?

--
Jim Carter
Rogers, Arkansas

Jim Carter wrote:
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
...

"Mark Hansen" wrote in message
...

Say What? ;-)


If it's just your transmitter that has failed you have not experienced a
two-way radio communications failure. Better the second time?



If you lose either TX or RX, then you don't have two-way communications.
Therefore you have two-way radio communications failure and should
operate
according to 91.185.


If you lose just transmitter or just receiver you can still communicate
one-way. Two-way radio communications failure means loss of both
transmitter and receiver.



Steve, quit being so argumentative and think for a change. Two-way
communication means the radio (hence operator) can send (1 way) and receive
(1 way). If you lose the transmitter or the receiver you are no longer in
two-way communication, although you may in fact still be in one-way
communication. How much simpler can that be?

If you still have a transponder and a receiver you still have two-way.

Or perhaps a transponder and VOR voice.